Once upon a time there was no such thing as "Weapons of Mass Destruction". There were, for sure, nuclear and thermonuclear weapons. Then along came the Soviets and suggested we call them "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and we throw in Chemical and Biological weapons as well.
When we think of such weapons we think in terms of thousand or tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of deaths.♠
Now, the criminal organization up in Michigan, which has been branded a "militia" is being charged with preparing to use a "weapon of mass destruction". This weapon would kill tens of people, perhaps even a hundred or so. This is not Hiroshima. Law Professor Ann Althouse comments on this in her Blog.
Is this IED really a "Weapon of Mass Destruction"? If it is, what is a B-61 Mod 7
Or turned the other way, as Ms Althouse does:
That blows a big hole in the notion that there weren't weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.Maybe Congress can change the law and we can go back to our old understanding.
Regards — Cliff
♠ Well, actually there is some question as to the effectiveness of chemical and biological weapons, but based upon the fear in the heart of the public, lets go with this.
1 comment:
Don't place any hope in Congress. They are more careless with language than any other body or person. Language is to Congress like alcohol and a loaded machine gun is to an inebriated monkey.
Post a Comment